General Politics Discussion (IX) [ARCHIVED] • Page 438

What a great spot for a trip right now. Like what.

 

Ya but it also included the macarena and Gangnam style Jesus chill out.

 

TL;DR version is this: SCOTUS just approved a hack trial judge's usurpation of the president's right to conduct foreign policy and they did so in a way that was both insanely hypocritical and intensely shady.

The long version is this:

Biden's admin decided not to continue with the "remain in Mexico" policy implemented by Trump. That policy required refugees and other hopeful immigrants to stay in Mexico while awaiting adjudication of their case by US immigration courts.

A lawsuit was filed challenging the Biden admin's choice, arguing that their decision to cancel the policy was "arbitrary and capricious" (this is the legal standard for proving that an administrative agency's decision was unlawful). At this stage in the litigation, the plaintiff requested an injunction -- in other words, they asked for a court order that required the Biden admin to reimplement the remain in Mexico program immediately pending the outcome of the trial. The trial court judge, an absolute partisan hack, granted the injunction and ordered the Biden admin to start up the program again and force Mexico, a sovereign foreign country, to temporarily house immigrants while they await the outcome of their US immigration case.

The DOJ filed an emergency motion to SCOTUS that basically asked SCOTUS to halt the trial court's injunction, for now, while the DOJ has a chance to appeal the trial court's decision. This is a routine request, which is why what the court did is so outrageous. In the Trump years, you might recall that there were several lawsuits filed against his immigration policies and some trial judges granted similar "nationwide injunctions" just as was done here. Trump's DOJ made the same motion requesting the injunctions be lifted pending their appeal, and SCOTUS almost ALWAYS granted those motions. Here, they DENIED the DOJ's motion, kept the injunction in place, and are forcing the Biden admin to continue this policy.

In addition to the hypocrisy of it, what SCOTUS did is shocking because it was done on the so-called "shadow docket." SCOTUS controls what cases it hears and decides. These are the cases with oral arguments and published decisions, etc. It is basically what you traditionally think of when you hear that a case was decided by SCOTUS. This is the regular docket. However, in "emergency" situations, usually involving last minute appeals in death penalty cases, the court will decide an issue without releasing an opinion explaining itself, hearing oral argument, or even letting us know who voted which way. This is the shadow docket. Until recently, the shadow docket was used sparingly, as I mentioned it was primarily used to dispose of last minute appeals in death penalty cases where the inmate was scheduled to be executed shortly. This new hyper conservative court has been using the shadow docket to actually make SUBSTANTIVE changes to the law. And by doing it in the shadow docket, they are basically depriving us of a written opinion explaining their reasons, full briefing and argument by the parties, and a full breakdown of who voted for or against. This case is a prime example: SCOTUS just allowed a federal judge to override the foreign policy decision of the president of the united states. To reimplement the REMAIN IN MEXICO policy, the US would need to negotiate with Mexico and get them to agree again to let us house these people in their country. And Biden has one week to do it or risk being in violation of a court order. It is an outrageous overreach by the trial judge. And SCOTUS approved of it without any hint of its reasoning or who voted in favor of it. All we know is that at least 5 of them voted for it.

 

To be fairrrrrrrrr........

The northern part of Afghanistan is GORGEOUS. Like, really beautiful landscapes. The summer seems like an odd choice, as I think the snow is light. In the 60's it was modernizing and becoming a hot spot for ski resorts.

But yeah, not really an opportune time to be there. Maybe they looked at all the NO FLY countries and decided AFG was the best of the worst lol.

 

i didn’t get a “doctor” until like a year ago.

 

Congrats, Tiffany.

 

I’m probably being an alarmist, but this feels like it should be setting the grounds for a fully blown constitutional crisis. The Supreme Court has been taking pot shots at legislation when it serves conservative ends for a while: see ACA challenges, VAWA, the slashing and burning of labor law in favor of employers recently, but they always implied the executive branch is at the high of its power when doing this type of international relations. The court compelling the president to put together a international relations solution for an issue created by largely partisan hackery seems like it should be prime grounds for president Biden to issue the challenge of making the court enforce its own decisions, and sending the stark reminder that the court has no inherent power to enact it’s orders. This would likely kick off a cascade of government branches and agencies (ICE and Boarder enforcement), ignoring the executive in turn, but this insidious creep of a bunch of hacks on the Supreme Court in a successful unrestrianed power grab needs to be stopped.

It sadly seems more likely that the executive will find a solution, no meaningful challenge to the creeping power of the courts will happen, and the SC will continue turning up the heat on partisan hackery locking us into generational minoritrian rule by republicans dictated by their worst arbitrary and capricious wants and beliefs.

 

BEADS?

 

Wealth tax now

 

Not sure why the officer would agree to this.

 

not sure if dems acting like its good that an officer shot and killed somebody is gonna turn out the way they think